Category Archives: Business Communication

People Hate Them on Yelp

 

A few months ago, I wrote about my interviews with owners and managers of local restaurants – many of whom were not at all shy in voicing their negative opinions about Yelp.  Part of their frustration, I think, comes from businesses’ inability to “opt out” of Yelp.   For example, one manager I spoke with said: “I wish I could remove my business from their site.”  But Yelp lists businesses whether they want to be listed or not.

I just learned about a West Coast restaurant that has been waging an anti-Yelp campaign and exercising its agency in an unusual way: by offering customers a discount if they post 1-star reviews of their business.  Yep, you read that right.  They are encouraging people to write negative reviews about their business on Yelp!

People Hate Us on Yelp

This tactic (which I mean in the Certeauian sense) simultaneously taps into some reviewers’ creativity and desire to write witty, parodic texts.

Here are some highlights:

Terrible.   They would not allow me to bring my own food from home and enjoy it in their warm and inviting dining room.

The service was way too friendly. I had to take a half day vacation due to the options. Way too authentic and reasonable too. Nothing like Olive Garden where you get all that bread and salad.

I don’t understand how this place is still even open! The place is too clean, there’s tons of alcohol behind the counter, and the food is good?

As one reviewer writes: “Brilliant way to stick it to Yelp.”  But at the same time, this tactic creates a conundrum for those reviewers who really do have a complaint with the establishment, since it may be difficult for readers to discern a “real” negative review from the dozens of “fake” 1-star reviews (many of which are ambivalent in the sentiment they express).

 

“drive-by Yelpers” and the Yelp filter

I’m amazed when people who use Yelp haven’t heard about the Yelp filter! For instance, 20 seconds into the trailer for the forthcoming documentary, Billion Dollar Bully,  several Yelp users are shown on camera saying “Filtered reviews? What are those? Are those the bad reviews?”

The short answer is that all reviews posted on Yelp automatically get screened by Yelp’s in-house filtering software.   This software uses an algorithm to determine which reviews seem to be legit (and those are the ones we get to see), and then “filters” those reviews which appear not to be legit (roughly 25% of reviews).  Interestingly, those reviews which have been filtered and identified as suspicious are still available to readers…but in order to view them, you have to scroll aaaaaaaaaallllllllll the way dowwwwwwnnnnn to the veeeerrrrrry bottom of the business’s listing on Yelp and then click on a small bit of text that says “ [# of] other reviews that are not currently recommended.”  How many users will actually bother to do that?  Probably not too many.

Recently, I came across an interesting study  in the online journal, First Monday, which compared a random sample of filtered reviews and non-filtered, visible reviews on Yelp.  While the author found no linguistic differences between the two data sets, he did find that non-filtered reviews tended to be slightly longer than filtered reviews.  He also found that non-filtered reviews were written by authors whose profiles tended to include photos of themselves (this was much less often the case for the authors of filtered reviews) – and that non-filtered reviews tended to be written by people who were prolific reviewers on Yelp with lots of Yelp friends.  The reviews that had been filtered were often written by a person who had only posted  1 review (or a few), and who had no (or very few) Yelp friends. In a story about Yelp from last week’s local newspaper, a Yelp spokesperson calls these kinds of authors “drive-by Yelpers.”

Is Yelping really helping?

Overheard this week:

  • 3 out-of-town business people explaining to their server how they finally decided on this particular restaurant, after checking out a number of other possible options located downtown: “We Yelped you guys before coming in.”
  • At a newly opened establishment. One server talking to a group of other servers: “I hear that Yelpers in this town are really vicious. Is that true?”

Besides being great examples of word formation processes in English, these bits of naturally-occurring language speak to the pervasiveness of Yelp in our daily lives.

This week, I launched Phase 2 of data collection for the latest project, which is looking at local businesses’ responses to online reviews.  So far, we’ve collected the data on whether or not (and to what extent) area restaurants post replies to reviews on TripAdvisor and Yelp.  And I’m now following up by contacting businesses in our sample, to find out what they think about these reviews and how they go about dealing with them.  At this point, I’ve communicated with a handful of businesses on my list, and the general impression I’m getting is that businesses feel like reviews on TripAdvisor tend to be classier than those on Yelp.  As one person I spoke with explained, if someone is going to post a nasty, unfair review, it’s more likely to appear on Yelp than on TripAdvisor.  I’ll be speaking with more businesses this week to see if this impression is fairly consistent across the sample.

And I also believe it’s a just matter of time before we hear someone say: “um, that was really…Yelpful.” 😉

Will anonymous reviews be protected by the first amendment?

This morning’s local paper featured a story about a Tampa lawyer who is involved in legal action over an anonymous online review of her business. She claims that the reviewer was not one of her clients, and is just someone who is trying to ruin her professional reputation, by posting a false review about her on Avvo.com. She is hoping that a Seattle court will (among other things) oblige the review site to disclose the identity of the reviewer.  This is one to keep an eye on, since the ruling on this case may have implications for other sites which allow individuals to post online reviews anonymously.

Can you get sued for posting a negative review of a business?

Apparently, yes, you can! According to this recent story in my local newspaper,  it is possible…though not very likely. (Thank goodness —  and thanks, Chris P., for keeping me updated!)

These days I’m enjoying the slower pace of summer, but still managing to keep pretty busy.  I am finally getting to work on a couple of papers about parody reviews that I’ve had in mind for about 2 years now.  Many of these texts are really funny.  This one is my current favorite  (posted under the “Delicious Women’s PhD Darling Sexy Costume”):

I wore this to my friend’s Halloween party. Everything was going fine until some jerk asked if he could see my discrete variables and if my f-value was significant. Some guy and his girlfriend asked if I’m into three – way ANOVAS. I was beyond insulted.

What can I say?…it appeals to my inner research geek.  Besides being humorous, parodies also have a critical dimension.  So from a scholarly perspective, I’m especially interested in how, with these kinds of texts, the review site becomes an arena for addressing gender politics, as well as a space for other forms of social critique.

And I’ve also recently launched the data collection phase for a very exciting new project.  This study will look at if/how/when/why local restaurants in my area respond to online reviews about their businesses.  Here’s a VERY preliminary finding: out of a semi-random sample of 50 popular local restaurants, only about 1/3 of them responded to reviews posted on 2 major sites.  My next mission is to find out why that is!

Strategies used by Writers of Fake Reviews

My local newspaper just featured a story about Yelp reviews of local restaurants.  In it, the author claims that the online environment is “rife with false reviews.”  And a little over a month ago, my cousin-in-law sent me a link to yet another news story about fake reviews. Of course, fake reviews remain  a problem — as the popular media continually reminds us. Given the anonymity that is afforded by posting on the internet, the PBS story’s correspondent describes the quest to identify fraudulent reviews as an “arms race” that will never be won.

However, as I was searching for recent academic work on this topic, I came across a paper that offers a slightly different perspective. In this study, researchers asked 80 people to write fake reviews. It was kind of like a homework assignment. They gave each participant the website of a particular hotel and told them to write either a positive, negative, or neutral review about their hotel for a site like TripAdvisor. After that, the researchers asked their participants to talk about how they went about composing those fake reviews. Interestingly, their participants used a variety of textual borrowing strategies, ranging from copying + pasting bits of existing TripAdvisor reviews for the same property, to paraphrasing from a model review. The findings of this study suggest that fake reviews actually *share many textual features with real reviews,* since they may be very closely derived from them.  Of course, this is just one of many reasons that makes some of them so difficult to detect.

Online Reviews in Languages other than English

Much of the research about online reviews has focused on English language reviews.   But online reviewing is a completely global phenomenon, and reviews are written in many other languages as well. For this reason, my colleague, Alice Chik, and I have been comparing reviews of restaurants in Hong Kong (written in Chinese, and posted on a local review site called OpenRice) with reviews of restaurants in New York (posted on Yelp). To try to keep things consistent, we selected only reviews of “Asian” restaurants which had received 1 Michelin star.

We found a lot of similarities in reviewing practices, for example, in terms of average review length as well as in many content features. But we also observed some interesting differences. For example, Hong Kong reviewers are a lot more specific about  food-related details, whereas New York reviewers are much more focused on matters of service and ambiance. Hong Kong reviewers also tend to get very descriptive about individual dishes, attending not only to taste and texture, but also to particular smells. (Not to get all Whorfian here, but as Dan Jurafsky points out in The Language of Food, Cantonese does have a particularly rich olfactory vocabulary…)

To learn more, look out for our article “A comparative multimodal discourse analysis of restaurant reviews from two geographical contexts” (Chik & Vásquez) in a forthcoming issue of Visual Communication.

Managing Businesses’ Reputations Online

Recently, I’ve been researching a genre that’s closely related to online reviews, which is businesses’ responses to online reviews.  Sites like TripAdvisor and Yelp provide a “right of reply” space for businesses to respond to reviews that have been posted about them. Usually, these responses appear directly below the review that they are responding to.

I’ve noticed that over the last 7 years – since I first began started studying online reviews – many, many more businesses have been taking advantage of these online spaces, and are using them as a tool to manage their reputations.  This is likely due to the overall growth in the number of online reviews, as well as in their influence.

One of my students, Yi Zhang, and I carried out a study of the characteristic features of a set businesses’ responses posted on TripAdvisor by 4- and 5-star hotels in China, following up on negative consumer reviews.  We found that these responses often take the format of a “traditional letter,” and are addressed to the specific individual who posted the complaint – even though their intended audience consists of a much larger group of “overhearers.”  We also found that there were 8 communicative “moves” that appeared in nearly all of the responses in our sample, which means that even though this is a new online genre, it is nevertheless quite predictable and formulaic.

One thing that surprised us though was that about 40% of the responses did not refer back to the original complaint, and many of these responses tended to be pretty generic, or underspecified.  In other words, these responses could apply to just about any type of problem, and could be “cut & pasted” in response to a number of different reviews.  This made us wonder how readers react to these kinds of follow-up messages from businesses.  Do they perceive them as less sincere than those which respond specifically to the issues discussed in the review?  We think that some type of “reader response” study to follow up on our findings could be really interesting – and very useful for businesses who are interested in determining the most effective ways of managing their online reputations.

Our study will soon appear in the journal, Discourse, Context & Media.  Yi and I will also be giving a presentation about our findings at the upcoming Association for Business Communication conference in Philadelphia.

Can Businesses Sue Online Reviewers if They Don’t Like What a Review Says?

A friend of mine recently sent me a link to a news story from ABC, which raises the issue of businesses suing individuals who post negative reviews.  Although this brief clip mentions TripAdvisor and Yelp, the main story really centers around one man who posts a negative online review on Angie’s List about his contractor, and who later finds himself with a letter from the contractor threatening legal action.  What seems even more outrageous is that, after reading the man’s review, the contractor withdrew the 10-year warranty on the remodeling work that he had done on the man’s kitchen!

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/business-owners-fight-negative-comments-online-24309900

(Just in case you don’t feel like watching the 2-minute clip, here’s the spoiler alert: In the end, the contractor does reinstate the warranty.)

ABC offers three bits of advice for reviewers, for avoiding similar problems with businesses they may wish to critique online:

1)      Before entering into a relationship with business, make sure to read the fine print in the contract, to ensure that there is nothing preventing you from writing about them online.

2)      Write only about your opinions, and include phrases such as “I think” or “In my experience.”  (This one is my favorite, of course, since it seems to imply that without these linguistic “subjectivizers,” the status of a claim made on a review site might be something OTHER than one’s opinion…???)

3)      When possible, include evidence to support your claims.  (for example, a photo of the bad meat in your sandwich.)

What is evident from this story is that businesses are definitely feeling the impact of online reviews. (Probably smaller businesses are feeling this even more than larger corporations.) And what’s more, they are trying to do as much as they can to not only manage their reputations, but also – in some cases – to defend themselves and to fight back when they feel they have been characterized unfairly.

I also think that this is fantastic example of what is undoubtedly a huge grey area in the legal realm: when it comes to posting opinions about others online, there’s a fine line between free speech and libel.

Whether it’s right or wrong, I predict that we will be seeing more responses like this from businesses in the future!